El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, anunció este martes la suspensión temporal del llamado “Proyecto Libertad”, la operación destinada a garantizar el tránsito de buques en el estrecho de Ormuz, en medio de los avances en las negociaciones con Irán.

“Hemos acordado mutuamente que, mientras el bloqueo seguirá en pleno vigor, el Proyecto Libertad… será pausado por un corto período de tiempo”, señaló Trump en sus redes sociales.

La decisión implica frenar momentáneamente el esquema de escolta y guiado de embarcaciones en una de las rutas marítimas más sensibles del mundo.

El mandatario explicó que la medida responde a pedidos de terceros países y al estado actual de las conversaciones diplomáticas.

“Basado en la solicitud de Pakistán y otros países… y el gran progreso hacia un acuerdo completo y final con representantes de Irán”, sostuvo, al justificar el cambio de estrategia.

Trump también destacó el resultado de la campaña militar previa.

“El tremendo éxito militar que hemos tenido durante la campaña contra Irán” fue uno de los factores que, según indicó, permitió avanzar hacia una instancia de negociación más favorable.

Pese a la pausa en el operativo marítimo, el presidente dejó en claro que otras medidas de presión continuarán vigentes.

“El bloqueo permanecerá en pleno vigor y efecto”, afirmó, marcando que la suspensión del proyecto no implica una relajación general de la postura estadounidense.

La decisión abre un compás de espera para evaluar si las conversaciones con Teherán logran cerrarse con un acuerdo definitivo.

Según Trump, el objetivo es “ver si el acuerdo puede ser finalizado y firmado” en el corto plazo, mientras se mantiene la presión en el terreno.

Más temprano, el secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, confirmó que la etapa ofensiva contra Irán finalizó y que la estrategia estadounidense pasó a un esquema centrado en la protección del tránsito marítimo.

“La operación ‘Furia Épica’ terminó… hemos concluido esa etapa”, afirmó en una conferencia en la Casa Blanca.

Rubio explicó que, tras el alto el fuego que comenzó a regir a inicios de abril, Washington puso en marcha el denominado “Proyecto Libertad”, orientado a asegurar la circulación de buques en el estrecho de Ormuz.

“Es una operación defensiva”, subrayó, al tiempo que aclaró que las fuerzas estadounidenses no iniciarán ataques. “Solo responderemos si Irán dispara primero”, precisó.

El funcionario también hizo referencia a la notificación enviada por Trump al Congreso, en la que se comunicó el cierre de la campaña militar iniciada el 28 de febrero. Esa comunicación coincidió con el límite legal establecido para solicitar autorización legislativa en caso de prolongar el despliegue de tropas en el exterior.

En ese contexto, Rubio cuestionó la Ley de Poderes de Guerra, una normativa vigente desde 1973 que obliga al Ejecutivo a obtener aval del Congreso para mantener operaciones militares más allá de 60 días. La calificó como “totalmente inconstitucional”, aunque señaló que el Gobierno mantuvo informados a los legisladores durante el conflicto para preservar el diálogo institucional.

La nueva fase combina presión diplomática, presencia militar disuasiva y medidas para sostener la navegación en el estrecho de Ormuz.

La pausa del “Proyecto Libertad” se inscribe en ese escenario, donde Estados Unidos evalúa si las negociaciones con Irán avanzan hacia un acuerdo definitivo sin renunciar a su capacidad de respuesta.

Israel y Estados Unidos atacaron Irán el 28 de febrero, matando a altos dirigentes y destruyendo importantes instalaciones militares y económicas, pero sin lograr el colapso de la república islámica, que ha respondido con ataques con misiles y drones en toda la región.

El 8 de abril, Trump declaró un alto el fuego con Irán, que desde entonces ha prorrogado a pesar de que las negociaciones con Teherán se encuentran estancadas.

Rubio afirmó que Estados Unidos ha “alcanzado los objetivos” de la guerra.

“Estos tipos se enfrentan a una destrucción real y catastrófica de su economía”, dijo, al tiempo que añadió que Trump seguía prefiriendo un acuerdo negociado con Irán.

(Con información de AFP y EFE)

An illegal immigrant woman convicted of attempting to kill her newborn baby on Long Island, New York, has been successfully deported from the United States, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Soili Xiomara Aparicio-Santos, an illegal immigrant from Honduras, was deported by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from New York in April. The agency said she was deported after serving just eight years in a New York prison sentence for attempted infant murder.  

Aparicio-Santos entered the country illegally under the Obama administration in 2014. She has had a final order of removal against her since 2014.

MIGRANT CONVICTED OF KILLING HIS SON ARRESTED BY ICE YEARS AFTER INITIAL DEPORTATION

In 2018, she was convicted of second-degree attempted murder, first and second-degree attempted assault, and endangering the welfare of a child. 

DHS said that despite being originally sentenced to 16 years in prison for her crime, Aparicio-Santos’ sentence was reduced to 10 years, of which she only ended up serving eight. However, DHS said that local authorities cooperated with ICE and notified the agency before her release, enabling federal agents to make the arrest.

The 41-year-old was living in Centereach, New York, in Suffolk County on Long Island, local outlet Daily Voice reported.

The outlet reported that in 2017, Aparicio-Santos attempted to kill her baby boy by smothering him with a pillow. A family member noticed her actions and called the police. The child reportedly avoided serious injuries and was placed in foster care.

ICE first lodged an immigration detainer — a request to hold — against Aparicio-Santos after she was initially arrested by Suffolk County police for first-degree reckless endangerment in 2017. The agency then lodged a second detainer in 2018 while she was serving her sentence, DHS said.

Lauren Bis, acting DHS assistant secretary, lauded the local Long Island authorities for cooperating with ICE to remove Aparicio-Santos.

«Thanks to cooperation by law enforcement and our ICE officers, this barbaric criminal is out of our country,» Bis said in a DHS news release.

DHS DEMANDS LETITIA JAMES TAKE ACTION OVER NEW YORK’S REFUSAL TO HONOR ICE DETAINERS

The Department of Homeland Security lodged an immigration detainer in 2017. (David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

«This monster attempted to KILL her own child the day he was born,» said Bis.

She slammed the Obama administration for having «released this attempted murderer into our country.»

Bis emphasized that DHS «need(s) cooperation from state and local politicians to get criminals like this out of our country,» adding, «Together, we can make America safe again.»

Suffolk and Nassau, New York, counties, both of which are majority Republican-controlled, stand in stark contrast with neighboring New York City in their approach to cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.

Suffolk County is currently battling a $112 million federal jury verdict after courts found the county violated constitutional rights by holding inmates past their release dates solely to honor ICE detainer requests.

Suffolk Attorney Thomas Dewey slammed the ruling, the New York Post reported, saying, «The jury’s preposterous and unjust damages award cannot stand.»

SOCIALIST MAYOR MAMDANI BASHES ICE AFTER CHAOTIC PROTEST LEADS TO ARRESTS: ‘CRUEL AND INHUMANE’

Mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks during a May Day rally at Washington Square Park in New York City on May 1, 2026. On Monday, Mamdani called for ICE to be abolished following the arrest of an illegal immigrant. (Yuki Iwamura/AP)

DHS said in its statement that seven of the top 10 safest cities in the U.S. cooperate with ICE.

The agency called partnerships with federal immigration enforcement and local law enforcement «critical to having the resources DHS needs to arrest criminal illegal aliens across the country.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«When politicians bar local law enforcement from working with DHS, law enforcement officers have to have a more visible presence to find and apprehend the criminals let out of jails and back into communities,» the agency said.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Suffolk County, New York, Police Department and Sheriff’s Office for comment.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., used campaign funds to pay for a subscription to Netflix from January to March despite his long-running criticism of the streaming service’s tax practices, Federal Election Commission records show.

Over the years, Sanders has repeatedly criticized Netflix for allegedly not paying its «fair share» of taxes and for raising prices on consumers as its executives grow wealthier. In contrast to these criticisms, the senator’s campaign began paying the streaming service $46.79 a month in January to cover a «subscription.» 

«Corporate greed is Netflix doubling its profit last year to a record $5.3 billion, avoiding over $1 billion in taxes [and] blaming a 10.7% price increase on ‘inflation’ squeezing $1.35 billion from its 75 million subscribers while its CEO became $200 million richer in the pandemic,» Sanders wrote in March 2022.

Sanders has also, on multiple occasions, criticized Netflix for paying $0 in federal taxes. Netflix has sharply reduced its federal tax liability for some years by using a variety of corporate tax credits.

BILL MAHER CALLS OUT BERNIE SANDERS, SAYS HE’S TIRED OF HEARING THE RICH DON’T PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES

«Your $8.99 Netflix subscription is more than the company paid in federal income taxes last year (nothing),» the senator posted to social media in 2019. «We are going to make massive corporations finally pay their fair share.»

Senate campaigns have only released their financial information up to March, meaning that Sanders’ donor-funded Netflix subscription may be ongoing.

Sanders’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment after being reached by Fox News Digital Tuesday morning.

UNEARTHED FEC RECORDS EXPOSES VULNERABLE DEM SENATOR’S HYPOCRISY ON TAKING CASH FROM BILLIONAIRES 

Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont and ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, arrives for a confirmation hearing in Washington, D.C., on July 16, 2025. (Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg)

The Vermont senator has faced criticism in the past over his use of campaign funds.

In 2023, Sanders transferred $200,000 in donor cash to the Sanders Institute, a nonprofit organization run by his wife and stepson. Since then, Sanders has continued to semi-regularly use his campaign account to fund his family charity.

«The facts present in this case and the family ties involved certainly raise legitimate concern,» Kendra Arnold, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, told Fox News Digital at the time. «If the nonprofit and its executive director are truly producing work and actually earning the money, it is not illegal, but it is frowned upon. On the other hand, if nothing or very little is being done to legitimately earn the money, then it is highly likely a serious campaign finance violation has taken place.»

ENERGY WATCHDOG EXPOSES EYE-POPPING CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SANDERS’ JET-SETTING TOUR: ‘FAKE SOCIALIST’

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is seen in the Senate subway on Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc)

The over $550,000 in donor funds Sanders in donor funds Sanders spent on private jets during his 2025 «Fighting Oligarchy» tour has also fallen under scrutiny.

«You don’t expect a socialist to fly commercial do you?» conservative political communications consultant Matt Gorman said. «There’s no bigger hypocrite than the liberal who chastises us for eating meat and using gas stoves, yet flies in private jets.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates interviewed Sanders for a segment in his Netflix original series titled «What’s Next? The Future with Bill Gates» in 2024.

The senator’s use of campaign funds to pay for a streaming service is relatively unusual. 

Campaign finance records show that only five political committees, including one belonging to Sanders, have made payments to Netflix for expenses described as some form of subscription over the past ten years.